Effectiveness and Safety of Inhaled Antibiotics in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. A Multicentre Observational Study

BackgroundWe aimed to describe the effectiveness and safety of inhaled antibiotics in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, as well as the patient profile in which they are usually prescribed and the patient groups that can most benefit from this treatment.MethodsMulticentre retrospective observational cohort study in COPD patients who had received ≥1 dose of inhaled antibiotics in the last 5 years. Clinical data from the two years prior to and subsequent to the start of the treatment were compared. Primary outcome: COPD exacerbations. Secondary outcomes: side effects, symptomatology (sputum purulence, dyspnoea), microbiological profile and pathogen eradication.ResultsOf 693 COPD patients analyzed (aged 74.1; 86.3% men; mean FEV₁ = 43.7%), 71.7% had bronchiectasis and 46.6% presented chronic bronchial infection (CBI) by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA). After 1 year of treatment with inhaled antibiotics, there was a significant decrease in the number of exacerbations (?33.3%; P < .001), hospital admissions (?33.3%; P < .001) and hospitalization days (?26.2%; P = .003). We found no difference in effectiveness between patients with or without associated bronchiectasis. Positive patient outcomes were more pronounced in PA-eradicated patients. We found a significant reduction in daily expectoration (?33.1%; P = .024), mucopurulent/purulent sputum (?53.9%; P < .001), isolation of any potentially pathogenic microorganisms (PPM) (?16.7%; P < .001), CBI by any PPM (?37.4%; P < .001) and CBI by PA (?49.8%; P < .001). CBI by any PPM and ≥three previous exacerbations were associated with a better treatment response. 25.4% of patients presented non-severe side-effects, the most frequent of these being bronchospasm (10.5%), dyspnoea (8.8%) and cough (1.7%).ConclusionsIn COPD patients with multiple exacerbations and/or CBI by any PPM (especially PA), inhaled antibiotics appear to be an effective and safe treatment, regardless of the presence of bronchiectasis.     

慢性泪囊炎患者应用鼻内镜下鼻腔泪囊造口术的临床效果及对安全性的影响

目的探讨慢性泪囊炎患者应用鼻内镜下鼻腔泪囊造口术的临床效果及安全性。方法选取2018年1月至2019年12月因慢性泪囊炎于本院接受治疗的46例患者为研究对象,随机分为研究组与对照组,各23例。对照组接受泪囊鼻腔造口治疗,研究组取鼻内镜下鼻腔泪囊造口术治疗,比较两组临床效果、手术指标以及并发症发生情况。结果研究组治疗总有效率高于对照组(P<0.05);研究组术中出血量少于对照组,手术及住院时间均短于对照组(P<0.05);研究组并发症总发生率低于对照组(P<0.05)。结论慢性泪囊炎患者采用鼻内镜下鼻腔泪囊造口术治疗效果显著,并发症较少,安全性较高,值得临床推广应用。     

Reacreditación o recertificación de los cirujanos generales en España: esa es la cuestión. Resultados de una encuesta nacional

IntroductionThe Law for the Regulation of Health Professions (LOPS) indicates that health professionals will carry out continuous training throughout their professional life, and will regularly prove their professional competence. The objective of the study was to carry out a national survey to find out the opinion of Spanish surgeons and thus be able to prepare a recertification project by the Spanish Association of Surgeons (AEC).MethodsCross-sectional observational study carried out in June-July 2020, through a survey sent to the members of the AEC.ResultsThe survey had a total of 1230 visits and an overall completion rate of 784 responses (67.3%). 69.6% were unaware of the LOPS forecasts and 83.4% were unaware of similar initiatives in other specialties and 95.5% agreed to demand adequate information. 71.4% believed it necessary but only 57% believed that it should be mandatory. 82.9% would agree that it should be regulated through an objective and predictable official procedure.ConclusionsThe concept of re-accreditation is not well known in our specialty and in view of the results obtained, adequate and reliable information seems necessary. Therefore, it would be pertinent to propose by the AEC a specific project to assess activities and skills.     

COVID-19 Gender Disparities and Mitigation Recommendations: A Narrative Review

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has rapidly created widespread impacts on global health and the economy. Data suggest that women are less susceptible to severe illness. However, sex-disaggregated data are incomplete, leaving room for misinterpretation, and focusing only on biologic sex underestimates the gendered impact of the pandemic on women. This narrative review summarizes what is known about gender disparities during the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic, domestic, and health burdens along with overlapping vulnerabilities related to the pandemic. In addition, this review outlines recommended strategies that advocacy groups, community leaders, and policymakers should implement to mitigate the widening gender disparities related to COVID-19.